• Sign up free today!

    Join in on the discussion, prediction leagues and competitions today! Sign up takes no longer than 5 minutes.

football forum

Climate Change

Recommended Posts

Discuss, share any news regarding one of the biggest threat the world faces today. 

Will humans make it to 2119 ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, nudge said:

Sao Paulo plunged into darkness as a result of the wildfires and cold weather fronts. Not sure if this is a completely unedited photo but it scares the f out of me. That's how apocalypse looks like.

I have seen a lot of that in Australia many moons ago but not so drastic as that photo plus it was summertime, I was sitting at a train station and looking towards the Dandenong Ranges and Upper Ferntree Gully area in the distance, smoke and red glows lighting up the sky from bush fires, I shuddered a bit then as when we emigrated to Australia in the early 60s we had a house in Upper Ferntree Gully (a lot of bush in them days) before we moved to Port Melbourne.

p04spg05.jpg

Ferntree-Gully.10.gif

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote.thumb.png.b126c1b8fda33a65666f62f935d1f2f0.png

The UK is set to miss net-zero 2050 target with ‘dire consequences’, MPs warn

AAGafQK.img?h=600&w=799&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f

The UK will miss its legally binding net-zero 2050 target with “dire consequences” unless climate policies are rapidly implemented, MPs have warned the government.

Efforts to reduce emissions have been undermined by “unacceptable” cutbacks and delays, according to a report from the Science and Technology Select Committee.

The government has cut grants for low-emissions cars, frozen fuel duty while train and bus fares have continued to rise and also removed policies to improve the energy efficiency of homes, MPs found.

Committee chair Norman Lamb said the UK is currently not on track to meet its goals into the 2030s, let alone net zero.

“Throughout our inquiry, it was worrying to hear that although the government may be ambitious when it comes to reducing carbon emissions, it is not putting the policies in place which are needed to achieve those targets. We need to see the government put its words into actions,” he said.

Gallery: Natural disasters linked to climate change (Stacker)

SLIDES - 1/21

AAFtXvH.img?h=571&w=799&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f

“We heard of cutbacks in various programmes and slow progress, which are incompatible with the UK’s two upcoming, legally binding carbon budgets – this is unacceptable. If governments across the world fail to act, it will have dire consequences for the environment and generations to come. The scale of the challenge cannot be underestimated.”

Hitting the target requires efforts to cut carbon emissions from heating systems, improve home energy efficiency, tackle vehicle pollution, support onshore wind and solar power and sustain nuclear power without growing the industry, the report said.

Meeting ambitions for virtually all cars and vans to be low carbon by 2050 will require 20,000 new registrations a week on average, compared to 1,200 ultra-low emissions vehicles registered each week in 2018, the report said.

Stuart Haszeldine, professor of carbon capture and storage at the University of Edinburgh, who was not involved in the report, said: “This illustrates the continual and widening UK gap between political top-down ambition, government delivery by the risk-averse civil service, and disconnect to conventional, commercial, un-charitable reason from the bottom-up.

“Fundamental change is required, but the government keeps papering the cracks instead of fixing the foundations."

The committee joined calls for the government to bring forward a ban on the sale of new conventional cars and vans planned for 2040 to 2035 at the latest, and for it to explicitly cover hybrid vehicles.

It also called for moves to tackle emissions from car manufacturing, and urged greater efforts to reduce vehicle ownership, and boost public transport and car-sharing, as well as walking and cycling.

The report also said the government must commit now to large-scale trials of low carbon heating technology such as heat pumps, and replacing gas with hydrogen.

A policy to make new homes “zero-carbon”, which was scrapped before it was implemented in 2016, should be urgently reintroduced, and incentives are needed to encourage people to make energy efficiency improvements, it said.

Ministers must support new onshore wind and large-scale solar power projects which have local backing, the report added.

The government should also publish an easily accessible central guide for members of the public explaining what measures individuals and households can take to support the UK’s emissions-cutting.

Myles Allen, professor of geosystem science at the University of Oxford, said stopping climate change is “astonishingly simple”.

He said: “What the government really needs to do is get the CEOs of about 20 fossil fuel companies into a room and ask them to explain how they plan to make both their activities and the products they sell compliant with net-zero global carbon dioxide emissions by mid-century. If any company cannot or will not answer the question, then we need to ask whether they should have a license to operate in the UK or a listing on the London Stock Exchange,” he said.

Danielle Rowley MP, shadow minister for business, energy and industrial strategy, said: “At a time when all policies should take account of environmental impact, bus and train fares have been allowed to increase year on year, often making driving the more affordable option. If the government was serious about taking the urgent action needed on the climate emergency it would take immediate steps today, for example banning fracking, overturning its effective ban on onshore wind, and extending free bus travel to all under-25s.”

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/uk-is-set-to-miss-net-zero-2050-target-with-dire-consequences-mps-warn/ar-AAGafQM?MSCC=1566456831&ocid=chromentp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It really frustrates me to converse with climate change deniers.

I wish they'd get past that phase and start arguing climate change is real but we should just keep emitting anyway.

On 07/08/2019 at 23:02, Stick With Azeem said:

Discuss, share any news regarding one of the biggest threat the world faces today. 

Will humans make it to 2119 ?

We'll be here in 2119. I'd suggest the timescales of a near extinction scenario from climate change would be 1000+ years. But economic catastrophe and mass displacement of persons would be sooner.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like to think of it as a race between how we’ll kill ourselves. Will it be war & nuclear holocaust? Or will it be climate change? Or will it be some cool mix of both.

Personally if we’re to go out in one of the 2 ways, I prefer Mother Earth’s fiery revenge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I like to think of it as a race between how we’ll kill ourselves. Will it be war & nuclear holocaust? Or will it be climate change? Or will it be some cool mix of both.

Personally if we’re to go out in one of the 2 ways, I prefer Mother Earth’s fiery revenge.

A nuclear war between Russia and US will block out the sun for a decade so it will be mixture of both probably :coffee:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to Bolsonaro the country doesn't have the resources to fight such an enormous fire.

Where are the billionaires who rushed to restore the Notre Dame?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Machado said:

According to Bolsonaro the country doesn't have the resources to fight such an enormous fire.

Where are the billionaires who rushed to restore the Notre Dame?

We have offered him help and haven't heard a response yet i believe, and i think the g7 did too but he refused and told Macron to fuck off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 23/08/2019 at 01:18, Dr. Gonzo said:

I like to think of it as a race between how we’ll kill ourselves. Will it be war & nuclear holocaust? Or will it be climate change? Or will it be some cool mix of both.

Personally if we’re to go out in one of the 2 ways, I prefer Mother Earth’s fiery revenge.

That's a much slower death.

Reduction in inhabitable land due to sea level rise, reduction in arable land due to climate intensity, mass famine and starvation, anarchy.

And the question of how governments deal with it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Berserker said:

We have offered him help and haven't heard a response yet i believe, and i think the g7 did too but he refused and told Macron to fuck off.

It's because he wants it to burn and as the typical nationalist, doesn't like outside meddling in the amazon. They have told us so a while ago:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-10/amazon-rainforest-is-ours-and-not-yours-brazil-tells-the-world

 

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/amazon-rainforest-fires-jair-bolsonaro-ngo-san-paolo-a9075071.html?fbclid=IwAR3j8te5eucLAm3cAVbDeGlaJvjaVzm03qIatIkHURT9atfVK7Ki9Xq_1oM

It’s alarming that this man has total control over a vast and vital resource that affects everyone on the planet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Machado said:

It's because he wants it to burn and as the typical nationalist, doesn't like outside meddling in the amazon. They have told us so a while ago:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-10/amazon-rainforest-is-ours-and-not-yours-brazil-tells-the-world

 

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/amazon-rainforest-fires-jair-bolsonaro-ngo-san-paolo-a9075071.html?fbclid=IwAR3j8te5eucLAm3cAVbDeGlaJvjaVzm03qIatIkHURT9atfVK7Ki9Xq_1oM

It’s alarming that this man has total control over a vast and vital resource that affects everyone on the planet.

Yeah he'd like to get rid of the jungle in favour of agriculture. I like him as well as Trump, however i'm against both of them's stances on climate change as it's undeniable it's real and it affects us all and if we don't fight it now we'll all be fucked no matter our political views.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Machado said:

According to Bolsonaro the country doesn't have the resources to fight such an enormous fire.

Where are the billionaires who rushed to restore the Notre Dame?

I think they must be history buffs rather than environmentalists...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're extinct within 200 years and it's absolutely hilarious. Watching the self-serving greed of humanity and its destruction of life everywhere. Human beings need to go. They've fucked the world for every other living thing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Artful Dodger said:

We're extinct within 200 years and it's absolutely hilarious. Watching the self-serving greed of humanity and its destruction of life everywhere. Human beings need to go. They've fucked the world for every other living thing. 

There could be less people by then but I I think extinction in that timeframe is extraordinarily unlikely. I get the impression that would disappoint you which is weird.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Harry said:

There could be less people by then but I I think extinction in that timeframe is extraordinarily unlikely. I get the impression that would disappoint you which is weird.

Human beings aren't the only thing alive on the planet but we are the most destructive and hell bent on choking the world with us. Humans will be extinct one day, just like the neanderthals before us are. Hopefully we get something better in our place 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll go with Harry, there will be a massive reduction in human population because of global conflicts and natural disasters caused by them, there won't be much powers left in the world or any which means there won't be any conflict for a long time and world will begin it's new circle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's definitely a major threat but I do feel it gets exaggerated heavily and that's ultimately harmful to the cause, and creates debate in an area where there was previously just indisputable science.

I'm not entirely sure how I would rank climate change threat in a list of things most likely to stunt the continued expansion of the human population out of climate change, nuclear war, artificial intelligence,zombie apocalypse or just anarchy breaking out from continued escalating frustration at politicians. However I don't need to have an order to those to support basic measures that would rebalance and re-price things based on their carbon footprint. If that tilts the balance of economics towards renewables, electric cars and nuclear power then our children will be much better off for it.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol Bolsonaro turned down the money G7 offered Brazil to keep that fire under control

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote.thumb.png.d3c86e8d399bf6034a93f897345da742.png

Great Barrier Reef outlook very poor, Australia says

1504183378_download(3).png.0115ae2048c7aa121cfa15d23b217351.png

355703011_download(1).thumb.png.41634246554c7b528c5e66c455186455.png

The Great Barrier Reef's outlook has been officially downgraded from poor to very poor due to climate change.

Rising sea temperatures thanks to human-driven global warming remain the biggest threat to the reef, a five-year Australian government report says.

Actions to save it "have never been more time-critical", the report reads.

Stretching over 2,300km (1,400 miles), the reef was designated a World Heritage site in 1981 for its "enormous scientific and intrinsic importance".

But in recent years the reef has been increasingly damaged

Unesco's World Heritage Committee is due to consider adding the reef to its list of sites that are "in danger".

The massive report documents the condition of the reef and its outlook for the future.

What does the report say?

Under Australian law, the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority (GBRMPA) must produce a report on the state of the World Heritage site every five years.

In the first report in 2009 scientists said the reef was "at a crossroads between a positive, well-managed future and a less certain one". The second report in 2014 ranked it as "an icon under pressure" with efforts needed to fight key threats.

VIDEO

download.png.494f8ad25303695d21fd27808fa4ab44.png

"Since then, the region has further deteriorated and, in 2019, Australia is caring for a changed and less resilient reef," the most recent report states.

Rising sea temperatures caused "mass bleaching events" in 2016 and 2017 that wiped out coral and destroyed habitats for other sea life. While some habitats remain in a good state, the condition of the site as a whole is worsening.

"Threats to the reef are multiple, cumulative and increasing," the report says. "The window of opportunity to improve the Reef's long-term future is now."

Scientists say the number of new corals plummeted by 89% on the reef thanks to recent bleaching events, which affected a 1,500km stretch.

Australia pledged A$500 million (£276m) to protect the reef last year.

Can we save the reef?

Since the report was released, environmentalist groups have been calling for greater global action to tackle the climate crisis, and for the Great Barrier Reef to be given extra protection.

Imogen Zethoven, director of strategy for the Australian Marine Conservation Society, said: "We can turn this around, but only if the prime minister cares enough to lead a government that wants to save it. And saving it means being a leader here and internationally to bring greenhouse gas emissions down.

"This is now the third Outlook Report. We've had 10 years of warnings, 10 years of rising greenhouse emissions and 10 years watching the Reef heading for a catastrophe."

837059256_download(2).thumb.png.fcf8db90e781b34513846e897f89b20a.png

Addressing reporters in Sydney, the GBRMPA's chief scientist, David Wachenfeld, agreed the reef's problems were "largely driven by climate change".

"Despite that, with the right mix of local actions to improve the resilience of the system and global actions to tackle climate change in the strongest and fastest way possible, we can turn that around," he added

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-49520949

Edited by CaaC (John)
Spacing correction

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote.thumb.png.afa09af7f8beb2af2ebca1019dc386fa.png

Wild geese change routes to cope with climate change

858954374_download(1).thumb.png.a8652b37eb28d657a9676b18b9a9d864.png

Barnacle geese are choosing new feeding sites to cope with climate change, according to Scottish researchers.

A team from St Andrews University, along with Norwegian, Dutch and British colleagues, found that the birds were flying further north in the Arctic.

The study is one of the first to provide hard evidence that wild animals are inventing new ways to cope with changing habitats.

The findings are based on 45 years of observations by experts.

The teams found that the migratory birds, which traditionally fuelled up, or staged, just South of the Arctic circle in Norway now mainly staged in northern Norway far above the Arctic circle.

Shifting patterns 'make sense'

Individual geese changed to a new route with other geese learning the new habit from each other, according to the findings.

The researchers added that barnacle geese had shifted their migratory route on their journey from the UK to their breeding grounds on Svalbard, a Norwegian archipelago, within the last 25 years.

378119830_download(2).thumb.png.c1f8823850ce0ef5f989583cac2530f2.png

Dr Thomas Oudman of the school of biology at St Andrew's, said: "It makes sense that the birds went even further north because where snow used to be very common there at the time of their arrival in Norway, these days it is often freshly green there: the most nutritious stage.

"What surprised us is that it is mainly the young geese who have shifted. The youngsters are responding to a trend they could not have experienced during their short life."

Adult geese are also increasingly shifting north, although they often return to the traditional areas in their old age.

Dr Oudman added: "These patterns point at a complex social system, which enables the geese to rapidly colonise newly available areas."

Contrary to most other migratory birds, barnacle geese flourish even while their natural habitat is rapidly changing.

Barnacle geese are able to adapt to climate change due to the availability of alternative places with sufficient food at the right time and without the threat of disturbance from humans or other dangerous animals.

The availability of alternative habitats may also help other animals to adapt to climate change.

Animal species which are less sociable or explore less may take much longer to discover such places.

The conclusions are based on analysis of 45 years of observations by the Norwegian Institute for Nature Research, St Andrews University, the University of Groningen in the Netherlands, BirdLife Norway and the British Waterfowl and Wetlands Trust.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-49551044

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote.thumb.png.e863a6c97621953990ddedd8a4d42b1d.png

Climate crisis: Greenland's ice faces melting 'death sentence'

VIDEO

download.thumb.png.3bd3fbac5a9125f831c875399ff3716c.png

Greenland's massive ice sheet may have melted by a record amount this year, scientists have warned.

During this year alone, it lost enough ice to raise the average global sea level by more than a millimetre.

Researchers say they're "astounded" by the acceleration in melting and fear for the future of cities on coasts around the world.

One glacier in southern Greenland has thinned by as much as 100 metres since I last filmed on it back in 2004.

FULL REPORT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the maths people that rate of melting is approximately 3 Olympic sizes swimming pools of new water in the ocean per second over the 15 years.... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Advertisement